The draft will last 25 rounds. You must draft 2 goalies, 6 defensemen, 12 forwards and a coach, with 4 additional picks to be used for whatever position(s) you want.

Trading is allowed. Trades must be equal in numbers, 2 picks for 2 picks, 1 player and a pick for 2 picks, and so on. Really lopsided trades can be vetoed. Rounds 15/16 through 23/24 will be double picks per round.

The time limit is 4 hours. If you miss a time window don't panic, just make up the pick ASAP. You can PM your preferred pick to someone beforehand and they can make the pick for you.

Suggestion: POST A REASON OR STATISTIC OR DESCRIPTION WITH YOUR PICK to aid discussion and let us know a bit about the pick, as many may not be household names, especially from other eras.

You must PM the next GM after your selection. And please post a notice to that effect on the draft thread to ensure a smooth flow to the draft.

Any player from any league or era are eligible as long as they were not drafted in the ATD 2011. As soon as a pick is posted, the next team's clock will begin even if an ineligible player is chosen: the pick will simply be made up as soon as possible.

Player selection should be based on what they have done (the 'next best' draft, so to speak, the greatest all-time careers not honored by being picked in the main ATD 2011 draft), and not what they will do in the future, though it's understood that there is a bit of historical hypothetical projection with players whose careers were cut short by injury.

Absolutely no dropping of players: once drafted they are drafted, but players could be traded if team needs change. At the end of the draft a team could pick up an undrafted UFA and simply discard a draft pick.

The number of teams that make the playoffs will depend on the number that qualify for the postseason. To qualify, a team must meet this all-time draft roster condition: Have on the team at least ONE player from each of the following all-time hockey periods:

1916 or earlier
1917-1942
1943-1965
1966-1979
1980-1994
1995-2004
in 2011 (ANY active/nonretired pro player with 300-plus games pro experience regardless of when he began his career)

The very first game ever played in a top pro league defines which time period for the required condition (so, an eighties player whose NHL or SEL rookie season started in 1979 would meet the 1966-79 time period requirement).

On another front, there will be an all-star team of 1LW, 1RW, 1C, 2D, 1G, and 1Coach voted on after the regular season.

So the only feedback on my "idea" so far is that DaveG is not opposed to it. Does anyone else have anything to add?

The point of the ATD and MLD is to give the best players of all-time their proper recognition. The 300-game threshold is a good idea in principle because it prevents some noob from coming in and messing with the integrity of the draft order, grabbing someone like John Tavares or Taylor Hall. It has worked in that regard. However, it needs to be revisited because it has also failed us because by the end of this draft we will have made 1355 picks and one player, Drew Doughty, should clearly have been among them, but he won't have been, because of this limitation. (if this was the usual MLD that took us just to pick #1000 that would be another story, of course)

I am mentioning Doughty's name because although he is undrafted, he is ineligible to be selected under the current rule. I believe that everyone is well aware that he's available and that a good number of GMs would have selected him already if not for that rule. One noob with a hard-on for a young phenom is one thing, half a draft worth of experienced GMs is another. The rule is failing us now.

So, what could we do? Well, we could abolish the rule here and now, but how fair is that when Doughty would just be the next selection made, even though someone may have been willing to take him 100 picks ago? We could abolish the rule following the MLD, but all that does is guarantee Doughty is the 1st overall pick in the AAA; he goes to whoever is lucky enough to get 1st pick, and that GM then has a built-in competitive advantage (not that competition means anything to me personally at the AAA level)

My proposed solution, which I feel is both more fair and more fun, was to leave the rule intact for the rest of the MLD, but grant Doughty "exceptional player" status and allow him to be drafted. But since some feel he should already be drafted, those people can put their money where their mouths are and "bid" for his services by giving up someone they already drafted. Whoever gives up the highest-drafted player gets Doughty. Their dropped player then goes back into the "pool" and is up for bid by any other team willing to pay to get him (again, highest-drafted player wins). And so on, until a player is dropped whom no one is currently interested in (in this case that player would be available for re-selection later)

As commissioner, I am going to make an executive decision and unilaterally decide to go ahead with this if I don't get feedback advising me not to. So if you don't want this to happen, please say so, but I expect you to explain why it's bad. Here's why I think it's good:

- It gets Doughty drafted in the appropriate draft slot for right now (if you take him, remember, we're judging him as if his career ends NOW)
- If you're happy with your team and won't give up anyone to get Doughty, you can rest assured that whoever does take him, will be a team you aren't as high on. If you think a "good" team will snag him, remember they'll have to give up a high pick to get him, and if they're a good team then their high pick was a good player. This isn't "free Doughty", this is "Doughty at a hefty price".
- If you feel your team is lagging behind the others, particularly at defense, this is a great chance to drop a player you took earlier on that wasn't so well-received, to add a better player. (I fully expect Doughty to end up with a less-confident GM for this reason, and that's good - if you think your team is good, then this team isn't a threat to you, with or without Doughty)
- If you think that this upsets the draft order because it could have caused the draft to go in a different direction, remember that 1) this is for fun and the appropriate appreciation of Doughty is more important, and 2) you have the chance to snag whatever player(s) get(s) dropped in this process by bidding for them, so if it was all "meant to be", you will get your guy.
- As commissioner and originator of the idea, I will not participate in any player bidding. So rest assured there is no "funny stuff" going on.

Please let me know tonight if you are vehemently against it, otherwise bidding is on, and let's have some fun with this.

So the only feedback on my "idea" so far is that DaveG is not opposed to it. Does anyone else have anything to add?

The point of the ATD and MLD is to give the best players of all-time their proper recognition. The 300-game threshold is a good idea in principle because it prevents some noob from coming in and messing with the integrity of the draft order, grabbing someone like John Tavares or Taylor Hall. It has worked in that regard. However, it needs to be revisited because it has also failed us because by the end of this draft we will have made 1355 picks and one player, Drew Doughty, should clearly have been among them, but he won't have been, because of this limitation. (if this was the usual MLD that took us just to pick #1000 that would be another story, of course)

I am mentioning Doughty's name because although he is undrafted, he is ineligible to be selected under the current rule. I believe that everyone is well aware that he's available and that a good number of GMs would have selected him already if not for that rule. One noob with a hard-on for a young phenom is one thing, half a draft worth of experienced GMs is another. The rule is failing us now.

So, what could we do? Well, we could abolish the rule here and now, but how fair is that when Doughty would just be the next selection made, even though someone may have been willing to take him 100 picks ago? We could abolish the rule following the MLD, but all that does is guarantee Doughty is the 1st overall pick in the AAA; he goes to whoever is lucky enough to get 1st pick, and that GM then has a built-in competitive advantage (not that competition means anything to me personally at the AAA level)

My proposed solution, which I feel is both more fair and more fun, was to leave the rule intact for the rest of the MLD, but grant Doughty "exceptional player" status and allow him to be drafted. But since some feel he should already be drafted, those people can put their money where their mouths are and "bid" for his services by giving up someone they already drafted. Whoever gives up the highest-drafted player gets Doughty. Their dropped player then goes back into the "pool" and is up for bid by any other team willing to pay to get him (again, highest-drafted player wins). And so on, until a player is dropped whom no one is currently interested in (in this case that player would be available for re-selection later)

As commissioner, I am going to make an executive decision and unilaterally decide to go ahead with this if I don't get feedback advising me not to. So if you don't want this to happen, please say so, but I expect you to explain why it's bad. Here's why I think it's good:

- It gets Doughty drafted in the appropriate draft slot for right now (if you take him, remember, we're judging him as if his career ends NOW)
- If you're happy with your team and won't give up anyone to get Doughty, you can rest assured that whoever does take him, will be a team you aren't as high on. If you think a "good" team will snag him, remember they'll have to give up a high pick to get him, and if they're a good team then their high pick was a good player. This isn't "free Doughty", this is "Doughty at a hefty price".
- If you feel your team is lagging behind the others, particularly at defense, this is a great chance to drop a player you took earlier on that wasn't so well-received, to add a better player. (I fully expect Doughty to end up with a less-confident GM for this reason, and that's good - if you think your team is good, then this team isn't a threat to you, with or without Doughty)
- If you think that this upsets the draft order because it could have caused the draft to go in a different direction, remember that 1) this is for fun and the appropriate appreciation of Doughty is more important, and 2) you have the chance to snag whatever player(s) get(s) dropped in this process by bidding for them, so if it was all "meant to be", you will get your guy.
- As commissioner and originator of the idea, I will not participate in any player bidding. So rest assured there is no "funny stuff" going on.

Please let me know tonight if you are vehemently against it, otherwise bidding is on, and let's have some fun with this.

I don't know why the entire Sutter family always gets drafted before Randy.

Well, that's not entirely true nor is it an entirely valid concern

First of all, Brent and Brian are clearly better, no one will disagree about that.

Ron is a poor man's 3rd/4th line center in the ATD so I personally think he warrants selection earlier than McKay. But if you're that high on McKay that think he should go back up to ATD 4th lines where he started, then this one can be considered debatable too.

Poor Dwayne has unfortunately become the punch line of ATD statements about mediocre players lately. He will see his stock fall next year, deservedly so. Will he fall past McKay? Should he? I'm open to arguments there.

Darryl should probably not be picked before McKay. But he usually isn't, either. (there was a streak of 4 drafts - 8 to 11 - where he was selected an average of 384 slots after McKay)

First of all, Brent and Brian are clearly better, no one will disagree about that.

Ron is a poor man's 3rd/4th line center in the ATD so I personally think he warrants selection earlier than McKay. But if you're that high on McKay that think he should go back up to ATD 4th lines where he started, then this one can be considered debatable too.

Poor Dwayne has unfortunately become the punch line of ATD statements about mediocre players lately. He will see his stock fall next year, deservedly so. Will he fall past McKay? Should he? I'm open to arguments there.

Darryl should probably not be picked before McKay. But he usually isn't, either. (there was a streak of 4 drafts - 8 to 11 - where he was selected an average of 384 slots after McKay)

**** should definitely not be picked before McKay. But he never is.

Obviously, Brent and Brian were much, much better players than McKay. Ron was quite a bit better too at his peak.

I don't see any substantial difference between McKay and Duane. If anything, McKay seems to have been a bigger part of his championship teams than Duane was. When I criticized the Duane Sutter pick in the ATD, it's because I knew I could get someone at least as good 600+ picks later or whenever McKay usually goes.

By the way, I gave you feedback on the "re-do" idea via PM, because you asked me specifically via PM.

Starting next year each person should be allowed to pick whoever we want regardless of games played. But there has to be a limit on that, maybe a maximum of 4 for each person. I think everyone here is educated enough with hockey history to prevent from a team being loaded with guys who are still active but put a limit as to how many of those people someone can draft.

I'll go along with whatever everyone decides but just wanted to throw my 2 cents in.

Were vecens and I the only ones not aware that the "300 game minimum for active players" rule was in effect before seventies came out with his grand proposal?

Edit: There is nothing in the OP that would declare such a player to be ineligible to be drafted, just ineligible to count towards the 2011 requirement.

Yeah.... I didn't know about it either.

Doughty was starting to get to the top of my short-list on defense. I think I'm probably higher on him than anybody - probably because of personal bias - but I still don't see him as an all-time great. I think he'll eventually be going in the main draft, but that's at least a few years away.

Yeah we were looking at him as a possible bottom pairing guy. Nothing more. I honestly see no reason for seventies to have brought this up at all. As TDMM said, we were just going off of the assumption that he just couldn't count towards the active player milestone for playoff qualification.

1) it sounds like a fun novelty
2) we had no idea he wasn't available anyway!

But I'm only okay with it if it's a one-time thing. This is a lot of contortion to get around the "300 game minimum" rule (which again, I had no idea was even in effect this time). If people hate that rule so much, then it really shouldn't be in effect in the future again ever. (I don't really care about the rule either way).

But I don't think that will happen. I think everyone either didn't know about the rule, and thus wasn't even interested in Doughty until now, or they did, and have abstained from drafting him for that reason.

Yes, it would be a one-time thing. Doughty is the only exceptional player. Two other guys with under 300 games are arguable MLD picks but not shoo-ins like Doughty, and we can just abolish the rule in time for the AAA, and they'll go in there somewhere.

As for the rule, it was a VI thing (and yes, it wasn't just about playoff eligibility, it definitely means don't even pick him). I can see the merits of it, but if it prevents us from taking someone even after they're the BPA (as a few people may see it), then it's not working. I don't mind it in the ATD, but there has to be a pick# that we get to where the rule evaporates. 1000 might be where I'd draw the line.

Starting next year each person should be allowed to pick whoever we want regardless of games played. But there has to be a limit on that, maybe a maximum of 4 for each person. I think everyone here is educated enough with hockey history to prevent from a team being loaded with guys who are still active but put a limit as to how many of those people someone can draft.

I'll go along with whatever everyone decides but just wanted to throw my 2 cents in.

If someone picked more than 4 players with less than 300 games experience, they'd pretty much guarantee themselves last place with the way the voting works...

But I don't think that will happen. I think everyone either didn't know about the rule, and thus wasn't even interested in Doughty until now, or they did, and have abstained from drafting him for that reason.

Yes, it would be a one-time thing. Doughty is the only exceptional player. Two other guys with under 300 games are arguable MLD picks but not shoo-ins like Doughty, and we can just abolish the rule in time for the AAA, and they'll go in there somewhere.

As for the rule, it was a VI thing (and yes, it wasn't just about playoff eligibility, it definitely means don't even pick him). I can see the merits of it, but if it prevents us from taking someone even after they're the BPA (as a few people may see it), then it's not working. I don't mind it in the ATD, but there has to be a pick# that we get to where the rule evaporates. 1000 might be where I'd draw the line.

For me, the merit of the rule is that it's just too soon to figure out how good an active player is if he's only played a couple of years, especially now that so many players start off at the age of 18.

I never really cared about limiting noob picks.

I honestly just assumed nobody was drafting Doughty because of VI's rants during the ATD about what a terrible pick he was last time.

For me, the merit of the rule is that it's just too soon to figure out how good an active player is if he's only played a couple of years, especially now that so many players start off at the age of 18.

Fixed by always remembering this mantra: "pretend he suffers a career ending inuury TODAY"

Quote:

I honestly just assumed nobody was drafting Doughty because of VI's rants during the ATD about what a terrible pick he was last time.

And, well, he was a bad pick at #901 with only two years experience. But now we're at 1210 and he has three years experience.

Gawd, I just can't resist taking these defensemen here... with all this research BM67 has been doing, uncovering the next-best D-man in this draft has been as easy scoring on Cloutier in the playoffs.

I'm sure by the time this draft is done, yet another player will have been shown to have had a couple of good seasons that earned him all-star/norris consideration, and his stock will rise considerably (this is the third one that I am the beneficiary of, along with Armstrong and Portland, and TDMM/vecens have two - Evans and Buswell), and someone else can have him but:

Regina selects Rudolph "Bingo" Kampman, D. Without knowing the all-star voting, it looked like Kampman was just a hard-hitting Maple Leaf defenseman of the 1930s and 40s; a good AAA candidate (he went in the AA last year). But now that it can be shown that he finished 6th in all-star voting among defensemen in 1941 and 7th in 1942, he is clearly due for a rise. (He did earn two insignificant votes in 1940 as well to place 9th). Note that there was weighted voting and actually fewer voters in Toronto than in any other city!

Kampman's nickname Bingo was due to his hard-hitting style. His career was effectively ended by WW2 as he spent the 1943, 1944 and 1945 seasons playing for the Halifax Army, Orrawa Commandos, New Glasgow Bombers and Dartmouth RCAF. When he came back for the 1946 season at age 31, he found himself in the AHL.

He played for the Allan Cup in 1936 and 1937 before his NHL career began at age 23. In his five full NHL seasons, he had the two significant ones that I mentioned above, and capped it off with the 1942 Stanley Cup, won, of course, in thrilling comeback fashion. In 1943 he was a 1st team all-star in the NSDHL and in the 1949 PCHL as well, demonstrating that he still played at a high level in these lower leagues he went onto.

With a five-year career and proof that he was considered among the better defensemen in the league for a time, is Kampman any worse than Bill Barilko? Barilko was a stocky, big hitter, played just 4 full seasons, died young and was considered a very good player on the way up. He never made the AST. I look forward to the results being compiled for those years so we can see how close he even came to making it, if at all. (at this rate, BM67 might only be a week away!) Surely Kampman is not an ATD player but we all know Barilko goes far, far too early and they should not be 850 picks apart. I'm not 100% convinced there should be a gap at all, until there is some proof that Barilko was that highly regarded in his four years and not just after the fact because he scored a cup-winning OT goal and then disappeared.

I say no rule is needed , in the grand scheme of things we aren't doing a ranking list ,because teams can draft by needs and then guys like Mike Fisher is in the ATD and Jason Spezza in the MLD whil it's clear sezza alays was bettr and the n1 center in ottawa